header-logo header-logo

19 May 2020
Issue: 7887 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

Immigration lawyers oppose fixed fees

Immigration lawyers have accused the government of using coronavirus to ‘rush through’ fee cuts when practitioners can least afford it

Fixed fees for asylum and immigration work are due to be introduced on 8 June, under the Civil Legal Aid (Remuneration) (Amendment) (Coronavirus) Regulations 2020, which were laid this week. This is a temporary measure for one year.

According to the Immigrational Legal Practitioners Association (ILPA), however, ‘the majority of files will exceed the new fixed fee and will therefore lose out financially as a result of this change’. A fee of £627 will be paid for work that would currently attract fees of £700, £1,000, £1,500 and £1,800.

The rates are more generous for lower value cases (for example, a £227 fee would rise to £627).

In a statement this week, ILPA said: ‘It is important to be clear, these changes that are being rolled out on an urgent basis, purportedly due to COVID-19, are not actually related to the pandemic at all.

‘We understand that the urgency is being driven by HMCTS’ desire to have everyone working within the new digital process, however we do not think that this should have been the top priority here, and the overriding desire to rush out that process is having a serious and negative impact on the sector.’

ILPA argued that proper consultation has not taken place, and it should have been able to complete the discussions it was having with the Ministry of Justice about fee structures before any change was made. In the meantime, hourly rates should be paid, ILPA said.

Bar Council chair Amanda Pinto QC said: ‘The new fee structure will result in immigration practitioners continuing to be underpaid for their work. These measures ought not to be implemented.’

However, an MoJ spokesperson said: ‘The new, increased fee structure has been under consideration for some time and reflects the digitalisation of the tribunal system, which has allowed justice to continue to be done during the coronavirus pandemic.

‘There will be a full consultation on these fee changes before they are finalised next year.’

 

Issue: 7887 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll